Office for Fair Access

The Office for Fair Access (OFFA) is an independent public body that
is intended to safeguard and promote fair access to higher education. It
approves and monitors 'access agreements'. All English universities and
colleges that want to charge higher fees must have an 'access
agreement' with OFFA.
The first Director, appointed in 2004, was Sir Martin Harris. He was followed by Les Ebdon, whose appointment was confirmed in February 2012.

Contents

Background

The Higher Education Act 2004 introduced the concept of variable tuition fees for the first time. Whilst some parts of the United Kingdom, most notably Scotland, did not implement top-up fees, most universities and higher education institutions (HEIs) in the United Kingdom are in England and are thus under the new regime.
That regime allowed HEIs to charge tuition fees of any amount from £0
to £3,000. (These caps were raised in 2010.) At the time this policy
was being debated there was considerable concern that the amount of debt new graduates would be faced with could dissuade some potential students from entering higher education altogether. Thus, as part of the debate, the Government of the United Kingdom
decided to institute a body to oversee the introduction of fees to the
extent of ensuring that such dissuasion did not occur. The Act
established the Office for Fair Access and gave OFFA the power to
prevent a HEI charging fees above £1,200 if it could not satisfy the
regulator that it would make adequate provision for widening access and
encouraging participation.
For the academic year starting September 2012, the amount that
institutions could charge increased to £9000, subject to approval by
OFFA.

Aims

OFFA states that it has three core aims:

To support and encourage improvements in participation rates in
higher education from low income and other under-represented groups

To reduce as far as practicable the barriers to higher education for
students from low income and other under-represented groups by ensuring
that institutions continue to invest in outreach and financial support

To support and encourage equality of opportunity through the
provision of clear and accessible financial information for students,
their parents/carers and their advisers.

These aims are primarily delivered through implementation of approved
access agreements, and OFFA's work in monitoring access agreements and
disseminating their view of good practice.

Access agreements

An access agreement is a document setting out how a university or
college charging higher fees intends to safeguard and promote fair
access to higher education through its outreach work, financial support
etc. It also includes targets and milestones, set by the
university/college itself.

Bursaries

OFFA defines a bursary as a cash award where the student’s
eligibility is either wholly or partially dependent on their assessed
household income. This is separate from a scholarship which it defines
as an award where eligibility is not dependent on the recipient’s
assessed household income. For example, some universities and colleges
offer scholarships based on academic criteria or whether the student
lives in the local area.
Before 2012-13, universities and colleges who charged higher tuition
fees had to give a minimum bursary to students entitled to receive the
full state Maintenance Grant or Special Support Grant. In 2011-12, the
minimum bursary was £338 although in practice, most universities and
colleges gave much more than the minimum bursary – the typical bursary
given to students on the full Maintenance Grant in 2011-12 was around
£900 a year. Students who started their course in 2011-12 or before must
continue to receive a minimum bursary.
From 2012-13, following Government changes to student finance, there
is no minimum bursary. Lower income students may be eligible for support
under the new National Scholarship Programme.

Criticism

Charges often made against OFFA are that it levels down rather than raises standards[1][2]
and that it replaces one form of unfairness with another as reforms are
being achieved by "disadvantaging" the brightest children.[3]